Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier. Urban growth boundaries to prevent sprawl into natural barriers are like the ounce of prevention that are worth the pound of cure...

Yeah, it's obvious, but it's amazing how many people just refuse to look at how natural processes can be beneficial to us all. From mangrove swamp eradication near resort areas to wetland destruction throughout the interior of the country, we've made an all out effort to make life as difficult as possible for ourselves. But oh well, your view of the ocean from your multi-million dollar home is much more important than those sea grass marshes that you dredged out in the bay. Now you'll really get to see the ocean up close!

StopLurkListen:Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier.

I would say having the town wiped off the map would make it a lot easier to do this.

Not only that, in 20-40 years the town will just rezone it and throw in more luxury apartments and parking again when the town rezones it. Property tax and and local back patting (money) will win out, always does.

StopLurkListen:Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run. But if the land isn't developed, it makes it a lot easier. Urban growth boundaries to prevent sprawl into natural barriers are like the ounce of prevention that are worth the pound of cure...

You're right. This is all going to be really, really hard to pull off, so we'd better just quit while we're ahead.

Mrtraveler01:catzies: Same as it ever was. Florida spent a billion over a hundred years in attempts to eradicate the Everglades, which wasn't such a good idea and now they're spending billions restoring it.

Thank the sugar industry for causing that situation in the first place.

And of course the sugar industry tried to fight restoring the Everglades tooth and nail as well.

As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!

sxacho:As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!

============

I'll un-baffle you. NJ is the most corrupt state in the Union. Yes, even more corrupt than Illinois.

Fissile:sxacho: As a Florida boy overly familiar with coastal building requirements and their environmental concerns, to hear about the lack of all this stuff in NJ is just baffling to me. I considered getting my NJ license to help out with some of this stuff up there but there's two major drawbacks I see. First, no one will want to hear what I've got to say, so no one would hire me except for maybe some government job. Second, I'd have to spend a lot of time in NJ.

If they don't change their ways, they'll be sorry. THE END IS NEAR! HEED MY WARNING!

============

I'll un-baffle you. NJ is the most corrupt state in the Union. Yes, even more corrupt than Illinois.

Could be worse, it could be like New Orleans which is just as corrupt as NJ and Illinois minus the efficiency.

Say what you want about NJ and Illinois, but at least they get shiat done.

As usual, short-term stupidity = long term pain.Maybe next time some developer corporate money-grubbing asswipe decides that the farking view (and the resulting $$$) from that beachfront crap they want to build the locals will think about this sh*t and tell them to GTFO.

Or they'll just bribe the city and county councils and planning boards and any other politician who's involved, and tear sh*t up anyway like they usually do. Not like the builders will be living there... why should they care?

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

I think hotels are OK also as long as they are built to withstand disasters. Tourists are likely to leave during a hurricane any way.

We should have figured out by now that it is not nice to fark with Mother Nature. And it is getting more costly each year. I don't want to pay for rebuilding the mansions of the rich when they burn, drown, slide into the valley, etc. I don't like to see the poor abandoned to their doom by eggregious politicians and racist SOBs either. They get pushed into the path of tornados, floods, storm surges, and other disasters because real estate con artists lobby politicians with buckets of money to allow them to ignore the environmental and safety issues of building on flood planes and former swamps. Screw real estate developers.

We end up picking up the tab for billions of dollars of externalities just as we do with anybody who lobbies the Government. You don't see people who grow healthy food advertising, marketing and lobbying us all to death. No, they can't afford it. It is the crap-mongers of this world who spend the big bucks to make sure we are docile, silent, and helpless victims of their exploitation, theft, and greed. Screw 'em all. Big Tobacco. Big Coal. Big Ag. Big Real Estate. Big Asbestos. Big Pollution. Every con artist man jack knave of them.

snocone:It takes a very Special Stupid to build a "permanent" structure on the shore of a lake, river, ocean.

Well, then it's a good thing our leaders in Congress and the White House carefully considered this possibility and acted accordingly based on sound environmental science, instead of throwing 60 billion dollars around because they were more interested in capitalizing on the emotions of the moment.

Gulper Eel:snocone: It takes a very Special Stupid to build a "permanent" structure on the shore of a lake, river, ocean.

Well, then it's a good thing our leaders in Congress and the White House carefully considered this possibility and acted accordingly based on sound environmental science, instead of throwing 60 billion dollars around because they were more interested in capitalizing on the emotions of the moment.

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

I think hotels are OK also as long as they are built to withstand disasters. Tourists are likely to leave during a hurricane any way.

We should have figured out by now that it is not nice to fark with Mother Nature. And it is getting more costly each year. I don't want to pay for rebuilding the mansions of the rich when they burn, drown, slide into the valley, etc. I don't like to see the poor abandoned to their doom by eggregious politicians and racist SOBs either. They get pushed into the path of tornados, floods, storm surges, and other disasters because real estate con artists lobby politicians with buckets of money to allow them to ignore the environmental and safety issues of building on flood planes and former swamps. Screw real estate developers.

We end up picking up the tab for billions of dollars of externalities just as we do with anybody who lobbies the Government. You don't see people who grow healthy food advertising, marketing and lobbying us all to death. No, they can't afford it. It is the crap-mongers of this world who spend the big bucks to make sure we are docile, silent, and helpless victims of ...

What sort of Commie Socalist crap are you spewing? A Real American wouldn't think like this!

TyrantII:Not only that, in 20-40 years the town will just rezone it and throw in more luxury apartments and parking again when the town rezones it. Property tax and and local back patting (money) will win out, always does.

New Jersey has green space credits available. Basically, the green zone funds are used to purchase "building credits" and put a deed restriction onto land. The land can't be developed after that. A number of farms have taken advantage of this program.

Not only should we restore those we have destroyed and protect those we have not destroyed, but we should not build residential housing on them. They are flooded regularly. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

Absolutely. Right down the hill from where I live, just a few minutes walk away, used to be a residential area. It got pretty much wiped out in 1946. So... they rebuilt. Then it got pretty much wiped out again in 1960. And they were enlightened. Now we have huge parks with lagoons for fishing and soccer fields and bridges and memorials and exhibition spaces and pavilions for parties and a beach and a golf course and so on, all of which everyone is pretty happy with. I've seen other, urban places where you come off the beach and have a quarter-mile of park with grass and trees and pavilions and drainage canals and whatever before you get to any serious "development," and again, nobody complains, because heck, they're living in an urban area and parks are nice things.

Nothing "Naturally protected" anything before. Theyre things that arose out of the disasters that came before. The reason there is a problem now is people building permanent settlements on that land that once nothing would have cared about being destroyed.

StopLurkListen:Good idea in theory, but it generally requires buying property, displacing people and removing buildings, all of which is expensive. Hard for a town to justify such an expense, even if it helps in the long run.

Duh. Just convert the excess biomass to Soylent Green and sell it to help offset the cost! Were you asleep during Econ 101?

ongbok:. Instead of building vulnerable suburbs (full of poor people or rich people, which means us people in the middle will foot the bills even if we don't live there ourselve) we should build parks, bicycle paths, recreational areas, and other things that are easily vacated in times of crisis and which can be rebuilt relatively quickly and cheaply when they are destroyed.

They do this in Japan. Look at a major river through Tokyo like the Tamagawa, it's surrounded by playgrounds, picnic areas, baseball and soccer fields on a flat area just above the flow, usually followed by embankments (to give the river room to flood without flooding the surrounding areas), which are topped by bike/footpaths that allow you move easily along the river instead of weaving through the streets to get places.

Believe me, a small part of that land is worth more than an entire podunk town in America, but it's been given over in the name of common sense.